Babygirl

Maybe if young actor Harrison Dickinson didn't play such a smug, arrogant creep, it would be easier to believe Nichole Kidman's character could instantly develop such a dangerous attraction to him in the new erotic thriller "Babygirl." And maybe if there weren't a real person named Luigi Mangione seducing millions of social media followers with a similar posture of sexy entitlement as he faces murder charges for a cold-blooded killing, it would be easier to dismiss this kinky drama written and directed by Halina Reijn as pure fantasy.

Either way, the movie is pretty much of a mess.

It's getting a bit of buzz at the moment for Kidman's recent Golden Globe nomination, and for the - gasp - lengths she went to to earn it.

In case you've missed the sizzling ad campaigns, "Babygirl" opens with an apparently nude Nicole testing the limits of R-ratings in the throes of passionate lovemaking with her husband (Antonio Banderas). As though that's not steamy enough, she finishes up with a kinky encore orgasm in front of her computer screen.

All this before the opening credits, and the scenes establishing her character Romy Mathis as the founder and CEO of a cutting-edge company that's streamlining Amazon-style commerce with robotics.

With her successful playwright husband, two beautiful teenage daughters, a corner office with floor-to-ceiling windows overlooking the Manhattan skyline, a penthouse and a mansion in the country, Romy's got it all. And she rules her domain with aloof, absolute control.

At least until the intern shows up.

His name is Samuel (Dickinson) and they meet by accident when he saves her from a savage German Shepherd attack on the sidewalk in front of her office. Later that morning she is formally introduced to the dog whisperer as a member of her company's incoming class of interns.

Samuel stands out of the crowd - at 6-foot-2 he towers over them, actually - but this doesn't explain why Romy can't keep her eyes off the condescending sneer usually on his face. He makes his disregard for her authority clear from the get-go, with the kind of attitude that would a guy fired, pronto, in any corporate setting in anyplace remotely resembling the real world.

Instead, Romy chooses to risk everything she has created and built in her corporate empire and perfect family to get him to practice some of that dog whispering on her.

What follows is lots, and lots, of seedy hotel rooms, office desk tops and even a rave, for her to keep discovering how low can she go. Turns out she was faking it in her perfect world. This young-enough-to-be-her-son lover is offering her a way out ... she thinks, and she's willing to commit career suicide to prove it.

Last year Emma Stone won the Oscar and a Golden Globe for her bold foray into sexuality in the brilliant "Poor Things." She made sex mainstream for awards season.

Kidman gets points for guts for following Emma's lead, and for still having an if-you've-got-it-flaunt-it body in her late 50s. But she still comes in a distant second to Stone's groundbreaking performance, which sealed the deal with a healthy sense of humor on the whole subject of sex.

Besides the corporate backstabbing and snake pit treachery, there are themes of fragile family dynamics along with Romy seriously twisted psyche in "Babygirl." But that's not what the audience has come to see.

Unfortunately, for those of us who never got the concept of power as an aphrodisiac, or are color-blind when it comes to differentiating 50 shades of gray, Reijn's screenplay doesn't make much sense. The eroticism the publicists are banking on gets tedious in a hurry, and would be of even less interest if it weren't Nicole Kidman up there, baring it almost all.

She remains one of the most versatile actresses on screen today, but "Babygirl" is at best a sideways step rather than a thrilling advance in her brilliant career.

Underdeveloped characters' storyline, the dialogue between them is flat, absolutely no chemistry between the main character and the young man. Nicole Kidman's character, meant to be a layered portrayal of vulnerability and control, comes across as shallow and poorly developed. The supporting cast, including Antonio Banderas, is equally underutilized, leaving their roles feeling more like afterthoughts than essential parts of the story. The script lacks depth, relying heavily on melodrama and predictable tropes rather than offering any fresh perspective on female desire or empowerment. Scenes that aim to be provocative or intense often feel forced and unconvincing, making the film's attempts at emotional resonance fall flat.

The pacing is another significant issue. The movie drags in its middle act, with repetitive dialogue and unnecessary subplots that add little value to the overall narrative.

Fatal Attraction, 9 1/2 Weeks, Unfaithful, 50 Shades etc - one of these moody, erotic films comes along about once a decade. Everyone either gets off a little, clutches their pearls or sees it for it is - a sexual fluff piece. They are almost always shot really gracefully and the cinematography is also always on point. Fine acting and a smoking hot couple for everyone in the audience to have a little something. The difference here is the all woman collaboration which was probably a really attractive draw for these actors - to see how this film in a genre dominated by Adrian Lyne compares. I can't believe I'm going to say this because I really enjoy her but I don't think Kidman was the right casting for the lead. She's beautiful, aging beautifully and has give some really good performances over the years - I didn't like this one. And the dude is cute but a little creepy too. It was entertaining and a little jaw dropping but the story and especially the ending was really clunky.

What really carries this film are the two excellent central performances from Nicole Kidman and Harris Dickinson. Without them, this film would be entirely forgettable, particularly because this film doesn't really break new ground in its genre and the plot is thin. Sophie Wilde and Antonio Banderas are also good in their supporting roles. Kidman is great in portraying a woman who wants to sink into her desires, but is constantly conflicted in doing so.

The score, soundtrack, atmosphere, the costumes Kidman wears, and cinematography all really elevate this film. The film feels very cold and aloof, which is in keeping with our protagonist. As alluded to earlier, the film's biggest issue is that the story is tenuous and not really anything new. It's surprisingly tame for what it is. It almost felt like the film was self-conscious and scared to really go there and be prurient. But perhaps that was intentional, to mirror Romy's reluctance to go there herself. While there is some nudity, it never really feels sexy. Perhaps that was the director's intent though. While sex scenes in erotic thrillers tend to be sexy, passionate, salacious, almost fantastical, the sex scenes in this film feel very organic, and even awkward at times. Between Romy and Samuel there are awkward silences, confusions as to what to do next, insecurities about intimacy. The result is that you feel like a fly on the wall. However, as a viewer, that is both positive and negative. Positive because it feels realistic, perhaps relatable. But negative because much of the film is difficult to watch. What really would have elevated this film is fleshing out Romy's past and her dark desires.

A nitpick I had with the film is regarding Samuel's tattoos. It felt like he was a walking bad-boy stereotype; the tats felt a bit too on-the-nose and obvious. Dickinson's presence alone was sufficient enough to signal to the audience his dark, dominant interiority. Dovetailing off of that point: while it was refreshing to see a power dynamic in a film wherein the younger of the two parties has the power, as it's typically portrayed as being the inverse, the abrupt jump from new intern to a forbidden affair with his boss was jarring and implausible, if we are to believe this film takes place in reality. But the director's conceit here very well may be a heightened version of reality, a fantasy.

That being said, the film is worth checking out, if only for the great acting.

In the genre of "erotic thriller" it is typically the male that is portrayed as the cheating spouse who gets caught up with the femme fatale.

Here, the role is reversed... it's the middle-aged career woman seeking sexual satisfaction outside her marriage with a younger co-worker.

Despite what some reviews here suggest though, this is not an audacious concept. It has been mined in such movies as Unfaithful and Ryan's Daughter.

And for a movie being marketed as an erotic thriller/mystery, there's none of that here. It's just a straight up drama more in the vein of 9-1/2 Weeks than movies such as Fatal Attraction or Body Heat.

There's a hint of what could have been in just one scene where Kidman's philandering corporate officer and her younger lover threaten each other with exposure. Which of them has the better ammo? We'll never know because the subject is never broached again.

Kidman deserves nods for leaning hard into her role as the unsatisfied wife who has kept a lid on her darker desires during the course of her marriage. Unfortunately, the younger man she takes on, Harris Dickinson, is no match for her. He doesn't have the gravitas or screen presence to suggest that Kidman's character would be at all interested in him.

An okay one-of watch for Kidman's performance.